Mass Shooting in Southerland Springs TX

Vladex · Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:57 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Ban all the guns starting with those that celebrate it , Army, Police, Movies and Video Games. Let's see how that goes.

About as well as the war on drugs or the banning of alcohol did. I find it funny that those that are so vocal for the banning of all guns are the same that are so vocal about how the absolute ban on drugs is a total failure...

People wanting to ban guns from people while arming the state agents are just want to be dictators and they can't see it.

DiamondFlyer · Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:57 pm

seb146 wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Ban all the guns starting with those that celebrate it , Army, Police, Movies and Video Games. Let's see how that goes.

About as well as the war on drugs or the banning of alcohol did. I find it funny that those that are so vocal for the banning of all guns are the same that are so vocal about how the absolute ban on drugs is a total failure...

Or, we could do what a majority of Americans want and have better regulation. Like with alcohol, cars, marijuana.

And, again, it is the right screaming about banning guns. Save that one quote from one Senator 30 years ago the right loves to dig up to "prove" that "all liberals" want to ban guns. You know: one person speaks for the group....

But your own puppet Dianne Feinstein straight up said, that no law would have prevented the Vegas shooting... Look, I'm not against reasonable new laws, but they are only something I can consider if you fund the ATF to enforce whats on the book. And you had 8 years of Comrade Barry to take care of that, and couldn't do it...

einsteinboricua · Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:59 pm

NoTime wrote:
"For the record," the complete misunderstanding of the Christian faith that you display in your first paragraph pretty much shows that your second paragraph is false. That, or you didn't pay much attention during those 12 years you were in school.

All right, Your Holiness. Please guide me in understanding the being called God and his ways.

Tugger · Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:12 pm

Requirements on gun ownership and use is the proper thing to have. The 2nd Amendment allows for regulation and limitations, to continuously work to improve the laws and requirements is something we should do. Horrible events like this take away from the reality that sound regulations and laws regarding guns and their use and ownership are good and needed.

The truth is laws and regulations will never be able to prevent something like this from occurring in the USA, gun laws are there to assist law enforcement and reduce the overall general gun violence problems that exist in the USA. The "regular violence". So using these tragedies is both meaningless and not really appropriate to the ones that lost their lives.

We can do better, we can reduce overall gun deaths (suicides being the largest component) occurring in the USA but due to the 2nd Amendment as it stands and is interpreted it will be nigh impossible to prevent unusual tragedies (Columbine, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Southerland) fully. There are hundreds of millions of firearms in the USA and any law's impact would take time, decades probably to take full effect. The two things that work to the "gun control" advantage is that criminal use of firearms is already pursued by law enforcement agencies, adding/fixing/imroving laws that will help them further isolate and identify those that use and enable criminals, and remove the illegal and criminally used firearms from circulation, will do a lot. Slowly, over years. This can be done and it will likely create a huge cry of concern from those that use firearms properly and safely. I don't know how you would ever assuage their concerns or fears. The good thing is that the majority of guns are owned by a small percentage of the population and are not used against others, are used and stored etc. safely and responsibly. Those firearms are already controlled as the vast majority of these owners are law abiding citizens and so will do their best to follow the laws. Slowly the criminals and those that are not willing or able to follow the laws will be addressed and the guns removed from circulation.

So unlike some who proclaim fearfully that gun control will cause "only criminals to have guns", I find that to be patently false. Criminals will be addressed and gun owners who follow the law (as they do now) will still have their guns and continue to out number those that use them illegally.

But for now, I feel for the community in Texas that lost so many of its citizens to a senseless and horrible act.

Tugg

Kiwirob · Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:33 pm

That’s the tragedy of this massacre, these poor children taken to a place of worship to be brainwashed into believing in fairy tales, if there parents hadn’t been so ignorant all those children would still be alive today. Religion is evil, always has been, always will be.

DIRECTFLT · Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:39 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
That’s the tragedy of this massacre, these poor children taken to a place of worship to be brainwashed into believing in fairy tales, if there parents hadn’t been so ignorant all those children would still be alive today. Religion is evil, always has been, always will be.

You sound as if you copied that statement from the killer's social media account... :oops:

Vladex · Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:45 pm

seb146 wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Ban all the guns starting with those that celebrate it , Army, Police, Movies and Video Games. Let's see how that goes.

About as well as the war on drugs or the banning of alcohol did. I find it funny that those that are so vocal for the banning of all guns are the same that are so vocal about how the absolute ban on drugs is a total failure...

Or, we could do what a majority of Americans want and have better regulation. Like with alcohol, cars, marijuana.

And, again, it is the right screaming about banning guns. Save that one quote from one Senator 30 years ago the right loves to dig up to "prove" that "all liberals" want to ban guns. You know: one person speaks for the group....

What you want is less guns for the people and more guns and power for the state. Liberals nor any politician want to ban all guns of course, that would bankrupt the movie industry and video game industry and they would lose their armed protection from the state.

wardialer · Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:08 pm

Look at all of Europe especially the Eastern European countries where guns are highly controlled and are illegal. Look at those country's crime rates and compare it to the USA? What does that tell you?

Its not hard to figure it out.

Less guns less crimes like the ones you see in the US.

And Europeans can handle much higher levels of stress than Americans. Because pretty much those who live or grew up in Eastern Europe went through wars and revolutions. Those people have a high tolerance levels of stress so they do not flip out like they do in the US.

Even Mexico and Canada have a lot more less gun crimes than America.
Go figure...

If we would take all guns away in this Nation, then pretty much we would of have way less of these crimes and lower rates of crimes equally effective than Eastern Europe, Mexico, and Canada.

And with that said, America is drugged up on psychotropic medications.
Europe also has banned all drugs like opiates, and all other medications like these completely.
This nation should also make these medications banned as well to reduce the violence.

WIederling · Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:34 pm

wardialer wrote:
And Europeans can handle much higher levels of stress than Americans. Because pretty much those who live or grew up in Eastern Europe went through wars and revolutions. Those people have a high tolerance levels of stress so they do not flip out like they do in the US.

IMU ( and at least for the EU ) it is social netting that limits stress.
you don't go into free fall from some untoward mishap.
The systems make it difficult to attach blame away from oneself
to the society and thus creating an overwhelming foe.

US society has higher level of competition.
you potentially can rise faster but the prevalent effect
is you fall deeper.
Loose your job and a lot of things will go tumbling.
start with loosing affordable ( barely ) healthcare.
You jobgiver folds? god chance your pensions go poof in sync.
What about your house and the loan attached?
....
The high risk levels explain the rabbit behavior of unions
but also susceptible people breaking in unpleasant ways.

luckyone · Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:53 pm

My first thought was "Gee wouldn't it be nice of places like Texas had less restrictive firearm regulations..." Now, as it is coming to light--even being reported on the evil fake news CNN--that this shooting could have been even worse if an individual present didn't also have a firearm and confronted the shooter. This fact, however, will support both sides of the gun control argument. Many will say that "if the other man hadn't been present, it would've been worse." Many will say, "yeah but 26 people are still dead because of some loon with a gun." We're not going to get anywhere. I can see both sides of that argument, though I don't know how I'd feel if it were my child or loved one who'd been killed.

wardialer wrote:
And with that said, America is drugged up on psychotropic medications.
Europe also has banned all drugs like opiates, and all other medications like these completely.
This nation should also make these medications banned as well to reduce the violence.

No, Europe has not completely banned opiates and psychotropic medications. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics and opiates can be had on both sides of the Atlantic, and many of them can be had in Europe in formulations not available in the United States (oxycodone immediately comes to mind). A great many of them were originally developed in Europe. Also, heroin can be legally prescribed in the UK and other European countries, and cannot in the States. Between the US and the UK at least, prescribing patterns per capita for antidepressants aren't much different. Now, if you would like to have a discussion about prescribing habits of opiates we can certainly do that, but get your facts straight before you do.

- Signed, a psychiatrist who knows these things.

BobPatterson · Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:30 pm

bgm wrote:
Time to break out the handy "Mass shooting in US checklist":

1. Send thoughts & prayers but not actually do anything useful

2. Argue over semantics of the term "assault rifle"

3. Argue over semantics of the term "terrorist" - if Muslim use it, if Christian/white use term "lone wolf" "mentally ill" "troubled past"

4. Congress does nothing but NRA increases donations just in case

5. Wait for next one, rinse, repeat

Good list. But little or no evidence that (# 4) the NRA increases contributions (to congresspersons).

It was a surprise to me to see that the total of such contributions since 1998 is less than $5 million.

Ad campaigns might be a very different matter.

MaverickM11 · Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:48 pm

Vladex wrote:
Liberals nor any politician want to ban all guns of course, that would bankrupt the movie industry and video game industry and they would lose their armed protection from the state.

Jesus Christ the NRA doesn't even trot out that old violent games = violent people trope anymore

einsteinboricua wrote:
NoTime wrote:
"For the record," the complete misunderstanding of the Christian faith that you display in your first paragraph pretty much shows that your second paragraph is false. That, or you didn't pay much attention during those 12 years you were in school.

All right, Your Holiness. Please guide me in understanding the being called God and his ways.

Yeah that ship has long sailed. American Christianity today is pussy grabbing, sham universities, insatiable greed, endless gun violence, disgust for the poor, turning your back on refugees, war hungry, and discrimination against anything that is non white christian. That's what's in the White House, that's what's in the cabinet, and that's what put them there. If you're not part of that cabal, you're either an outlier or complicit, and not in an Ivanka kind of way.

EA CO AS wrote:
Awful, just awful. What the hell is the matter with people?

Interesting to note that someone who was ineligible to own a firearm somehow had one, a designated “gun free zone” only protected the shooter, and yes, he was ultimately stopped by a good guy with a gun.

Nonsense, more nonsense, wrapped in nonsense. It was not a "gun free zone", as if barely anything still is in Texas. He was stopped by a self inflicted gunshot. Or are you saying he's both the good and the bad guy with the gun?

bgm wrote:
Time to break out the handy "Mass shooting in US checklist":

1. Send thoughts & prayers but not actually do anything useful

2. Argue over semantics of the term "assault rifle"

3. Argue over semantics of the term "terrorist" - if Muslim use it, if Christian/white use term "lone wolf" "mentally ill" "troubled past"

4. Congress does nothing but NRA increases donations just in case

5. Wait for next one, rinse, repeat

Nothing else to say really...just leave the flags at half mast for the next one...

casinterest · Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:50 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
bgm wrote:
Time to break out the handy "Mass shooting in US checklist":

1. Send thoughts & prayers but not actually do anything useful

2. Argue over semantics of the term "assault rifle"

3. Argue over semantics of the term "terrorist" - if Muslim use it, if Christian/white use term "lone wolf" "mentally ill" "troubled past"

4. Congress does nothing but NRA increases donations just in case

5. Wait for next one, rinse, repeat

Good list. But little or no evidence that (# 4) the NRA increases contributions (to congresspersons).

It was a surprise to me to see that the total of such contributions since 1998 is less than $5 million.

Ad campaigns might be a very different matter.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... ra-spends/

"If you add it all up -- candidate and party contributions, independent expenditures, and lobbying -- the NRA has spent $203.2 million on political activities since 1998."

wingman · Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:57 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
American Christianity today is pussy grabbing, sham universities, insatiable greed, endless gun violence, disgust for the poor, turning your back on refugees, war hungry, and discrimination against anything that is non white christian. Nothing else to say really...just leave the flags at half mast for the next one...

The other thing about American Christians is that their thoughts and prayers suck. All countries have family fights and mental health issues..and we know it's not the guns, so all that's left in my opinion is the lack of effectiveness of the thoughts and prayers. It's sad that all other modern, industrialized countries are better than us at thinking and praying. It's bullshit! We have all these churches and super religious politicians but the thinkery and prayerery stuff is third rate. Maybe this time Americans that claim to be thinking and praying will up their game and this will be the last mass shooting. Come on people, think harder and really pray like crazy..I know you can do it!

Tugger · Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:59 pm

One thing I am being confused about, it is being reported that the.... vile human being purchased the rifle last year in San Antonio and also that he was denied a license to carry a gun by authorities in Texas.
So you do not need to have a license to buy a gun in Texas? I guess you buy one and keep it at your house? Seems like the two two should go hand in hand (background check, license, and purchase).

Tugg

Vladex · Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:14 pm

So the Vegas shooter was driven by anti Trump ideology and the Texas shooter was driven by an Atheist ideology. Let's see if that leads anywhere.

casinterest · Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:16 pm

Vladex wrote:
So the Vegas shooter was driven by anti Trump ideology and the Texas shooter was driven by an Atheist ideology. Let's see if that leads anywhere.

So that would be ignoring the facts.

the current operating theories are
Vegas: Money issues
Texas: Domestic issues: His mother in law and Grandmother in law attended that church.

Either way, there were deep mental breaks that allowed them to use mass violence on innocent unsuspecting people.

Tugger · Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:18 pm

Vladex wrote:
the Texas shooter was driven by an Atheist ideology. L

What "atheist ideology" are you claiming drove his actions? I can think of none.

Tugg

Dutchy · Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:54 pm

One shoe bomber tried to blow up a plane and now we take off our shoes.
1520 mass shootings since Sandy Hook and Congress has done NOTHING.
— Michael Skolnik (@MichaelSkolnik) 6 november 2017

MaverickM11 · Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:07 pm

Vladex wrote:
So the Vegas shooter was driven by anti Trump ideology and the Texas shooter was driven by an Atheist ideology. Let's see if that leads anywhere.

That's not supported by anything anywhere but I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that no amount of facts will change your total divorce from reality.

maortega15 · Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:30 pm

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/efcd9a5a-6 ... t-the.html

:roll:

kasimir · Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:45 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Ban all the guns starting with those that celebrate it , Army, Police, Movies and Video Games. Let's see how that goes.

About as well as the war on drugs or the banning of alcohol did. I find it funny that those that are so vocal for the banning of all guns are the same that are so vocal about how the absolute ban on drugs is a total failure...

You Americans are just so funny, a rational argument cannot be held and this is the typical example, most of you can only think in extremes! It's either second amendment f..k yeah or no guns for nobody :roll:

Most countries in the world have NOT banned guns/firearms, they are just regulated, in some countries more then others... Next to that, most countries except the US don't view guns as a symbol of freedom (which the NRA has created), but a tool that is primarily there to hunt or kill and therefor most don't want or even care to own a gun!

Everybody understands that guns are part of your American culture, but there is a difference between obsession and culture. Let me give you a completely different example. In Germany, beer is considered part of the culture. But that doesn't mean that beer is not regulated in Germany. There are rules, like drinking age, alcohol and driving etc etc and nobody in Germany is complaining about it and you can still enjoy your beer there!

What the USA needs is stricter regulations, nobody wants to take your guns away, but there is no good reason for example to open carry or that firearms are sold with no background checks at gun fairs or on the second hand markets or mentally ill can buy guns. There are already regulations, like that automatic weapons are banned or you cannot buy grenades or for pete's sake that anybody can buy a thermo nuclear warhead! There are already limits and regulations and nobody is complaining, just tighten up your gun laws to the point that you can still enjoy your second amendment and own a firearm for your protection at home, but that there are rules that keep your country safer in general! It's about finding a balance...

And before anybody says it, yes I know, there is no 100% safety and never will be, but is it so hard to get those ridiculous amount of gun related deaths down that your country has??? :banghead:

You like to be patriots and talk about keeping your country safe and so on, maybe start by making sure that less of your fellow country people get killed for no good reason...

wingman · Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:52 pm

See? If you just wait long enough the shit you imagine is too diificult to make up ends up getting broadcast on Fox News. “My coworkers and i were like you know in the kitchen ok? And we were like saying hos much we love God and i was like my thawts and prayurs are with the victims but then we were like theyre really lucky because they were killed so close to Jesus that they were like already in Heaven because of their thawts and prayers. I know it sounds complicated but i really feel like church is the best place to get shot”.

That Fox lady is the best advert against organized religion since The Vatican.

flipdewaf · Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:06 pm

Athiest ideology = ? I don't collect stamps and that's not why I particularly did what I did today. I didn't board a train in London this morning because I don't like a make believe being. Attacking a person is not a reason is difficult as it less tangible and less easy to latch on to. A god of any religion is nothing more, and nothing less than a head to hang the hat that [b]YOU[\b]
wear. If you think your god is different you are wrong!

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

notaxonrotax · Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:30 pm

luckyone wrote:
My first thought was "Gee wouldn't it be nice of places like Texas had less restrictive firearm regulations..." Now, as it is coming to light--even being reported on the evil fake news CNN
- Signed, a psychiatrist who knows these things.

Something you don't see on, according to you "fake CNN":

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a-o9pwWUzz0

No Tax On Rotax

seb146 · Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:00 am

DiamondFlyer wrote:
seb146 wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:

About as well as the war on drugs or the banning of alcohol did. I find it funny that those that are so vocal for the banning of all guns are the same that are so vocal about how the absolute ban on drugs is a total failure...

Or, we could do what a majority of Americans want and have better regulation. Like with alcohol, cars, marijuana.

And, again, it is the right screaming about banning guns. Save that one quote from one Senator 30 years ago the right loves to dig up to "prove" that "all liberals" want to ban guns. You know: one person speaks for the group....

But your own puppet Dianne Feinstein straight up said, that no law would have prevented the Vegas shooting... Look, I'm not against reasonable new laws, but they are only something I can consider if you fund the ATF to enforce whats on the book. And you had 8 years of Comrade Barry to take care of that, and couldn't do it...

Couldn't do it because people like you kept saying "don't ban guns" and kept changing the definition of assault weapons and just want everyone to have guns because Second Amendment. And, no, with bump stocks not being covered under law, Las Vegas was not preventable.

Do you even know what an assault weapon is?

And you saying you are not against reasonable new laws is laughable. EVERYONE has been saying that for DECADES and you and all you ammosexuals just say "you can not take away our Second Amendment rights!" You don't want reasonable laws. You have proven that Republicans are fine with mass shootings. You all made that perfectly clear after Sandy Hook and you are making it perfectly clear now.

You no longer have the right to say you belong to the party of life. You all choose death and murder and are happy about it.

luckyone · Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:11 am

notaxonrotax wrote:
luckyone wrote:
My first thought was "Gee wouldn't it be nice of places like Texas had less restrictive firearm regulations..." Now, as it is coming to light--even being reported on the evil fake news CNN
- Signed, a psychiatrist who knows these things.

Something you don't see on, according to you "fake CNN":

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a-o9pwWUzz0

No Tax On Rotax

You clearly missed my sarcasm.

casinterest · Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:13 am

New update.
The Air Force did not notify the FBI about the domestic abuse court marital. This would have been a disqualifying offense that could have kept the shooter from purchasing the gun. So is the Federal Government responsible?

The brave and heroic gentleman (Stephen Willeford)that rushed to the site with the gun and confronted the shooter, and chased down in vehicle with another hero( Johnnie Langendorff), was a NRA instructor. So the training came in handy, and these two may have averted further deaths. These men did stop the man from doing further harm, and made sure LEO's knew who was responsible and where he was.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... TE=DEFAULT

notaxonrotax · Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:20 am

luckyone wrote:
notaxonrotax wrote:
luckyone wrote:

No Tax On Rotax

You clearly missed my sarcasm.

You clearly missed mine.

I just wanted to put this video out there!
"Evil CNN" does not broadcast that stuff.

No Tax On Rotax

EA CO AS · Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:00 am

MaverickM11 wrote:
It was not a "gun free zone"

I stand corrected; their website and bylaws do not specify the church as being a designated "gun free zone"

http://www.ssfb.net/

It is interesting to note, however, that churchgoers cannot simply carry their own weapons, and a new law in TX only recently permitted churches to allow them to select teams of trained congregants to firearms instead of hiring private security:

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/New-L ... 08003.html

Fair-use excerpt:

Security at churches has been top of mind after horrific scenes like the 1999 tragedy at Wedgewood Baptist in Fort Worth and more recently in Charleston, South Carolina.

"You can't just tell everybody bring your guns to church and here we go, it needs to be people who are legally allowed to carry," said retired Hurst Police Officer and church security expert of Sheepdog Seminars, Jimmy Meeks. He believes the new law will soon give churches more choices for security.

Under current legislation, in order for churches to have armed security they must hire a private licensed company or officer. The new bill will allow congregations to make up their own security teams with members who are legally allowed to carry a gun on a volunteer basis only, but that person cannot wear a uniform or badge portraying themselves as "security."

MaverickM11 wrote:
He was stopped by a self inflicted gunshot.

Not entirely accurate.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/texas- ... index.html

...he was confronted and shot by an armed resident, Stephen Willeford. After Kelley was shot, he called his father, telling him he didn't think he was going to make it, Martin said. That's when Kelley shot himself.

So he was actually stopped by the "good guy with a gun," Stephen Willeford. His life subsequently ended by his own hand, but he was stopped, for all intents and purposes, by Mr. Willeford.

Vladex · Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:57 am

flipdewaf wrote:
Athiest ideology = ? I don't collect stamps and that's not why I particularly did what I did today. I didn't board a train in London this morning because I don't like a make believe being. Attacking a person is not a reason is difficult as it less tangible and less easy to latch on to. A god of any religion is nothing more, and nothing less than a head to hang the hat that [b]YOU[\b]
wear. If you think your god is different you are wrong!

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was liking all the atheist links , just like Vegas shooter was in anti Trump rallies.
https://www.google.ca/search?q=devin+ke ... jwTnyL_oDg

ltbewr · Tue Nov 07, 2017 3:43 am

There are several major themes that come out to explain such mass murder attacks:
1) Poor mental health of the attacker. That compounded in particular in the USA by the lack of access to good and affordable mental and general health care, systems of providing it that are more about profits than care 1st, and cultural/economic issues of having or admitting to mental health problems.
2) Financial insecurity of the attacker. In massive debt, unable to get a decent job including from their mental issues, business/employment failures, a social welfare net full of holes. The truck attacker in NY was in serious financial trouble and likely so was the the Texas church attacker. That is also far too often a factor in the large numbers of murders in places like the south side of Chicago and other cities.
3) Far too easy to access and possess powerful, military class weapons in the USA legally and illegally
4) A culture that glorifies that the answer to your problems is to use a bomb, vehicle, guns, etc.
5) Our not wanting to show the carnage from such events. The other day on some websites, they showed pictures of the scattered remains of a suicide bomber I believe in Iraq, his head in the gutter of a street and his body parts all over the place. Due to privacy, cultural reasons and some believe so not to encourage some attackers, we won't allow publication of such pictures. We did so in the Vietnam era and it pretty much ended there. Maybe if we showed more pictures of the brutalized bodies of humans from such acts, it might motivate to do something about the other issues I noted previously. Yet we allow 'cartoon' carnage or none at all in far too may TV programs, movies and video games while hide the truth.
6) Far too many politicians who won't do anything so don't lose their next election and pressure groups (like the NRA) that prevent real changes.

Super80Fan · Tue Nov 07, 2017 3:48 am

That's the great thing about the internet, everyone's an atheist. Then I see you walking into Church on Sunday. If you're blaming Christians/The Church, might as well shut down/ban everywhere that a shooting has occurred at, including government buildings, arenas, casinos, airports, nightclubs, and public schools/universities. Oh and don't forget Walmart.

seb146 · Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:02 am

Here is another "good Christian" making "good Christian" judgments with a gun

https://www.yahoo.com/news/father-kills ... 39242.html

But, yeah, tell us how it is non Christian people destroying families and creating hate.

Kiwirob · Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:29 am

EA CO AS wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
It was not a "gun free zone"

I stand corrected; their website and bylaws do not specify the church as being a designated "gun free zone"

http://www.ssfb.net/

It is interesting to note, however, that churchgoers cannot simply carry their own weapons, and a new law in TX only recently permitted churches to allow them to select teams of trained congregants to firearms instead of hiring private security:

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/New-L ... 08003.html

Fair-use excerpt:

Security at churches has been top of mind after horrific scenes like the 1999 tragedy at Wedgewood Baptist in Fort Worth and more recently in Charleston, South Carolina.

"You can't just tell everybody bring your guns to church and here we go, it needs to be people who are legally allowed to carry," said retired Hurst Police Officer and church security expert of Sheepdog Seminars, Jimmy Meeks. He believes the new law will soon give churches more choices for security.

Under current legislation, in order for churches to have armed security they must hire a private licensed company or officer. The new bill will allow congregations to make up their own security teams with members who are legally allowed to carry a gun on a volunteer basis only, but that person cannot wear a uniform or badge portraying themselves as "security."

MaverickM11 wrote:
He was stopped by a self inflicted gunshot.

Not entirely accurate.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/texas- ... index.html

...he was confronted and shot by an armed resident, Stephen Willeford. After Kelley was shot, he called his father, telling him he didn't think he was going to make it, Martin said. That's when Kelley shot himself.

So he was actually stopped by the "good guy with a gun," Stephen Willeford. His life subsequently ended by his own hand, but he was stopped, for all intents and purposes, by Mr. Willeford.

The good guy with the gun was far to late to save 26 people, the god guy failed, the bad guy with the gun had already finished up his slaughtering and was heading off.

seahawk · Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:31 am

The guy with the gun is a hero and it showed how important it is to have armed citizens. More guns would stop such events, only people that do not carry are defenceless. It should be mandatory to carry a gun for self defence.

WIederling · Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:32 am

seahawk wrote:
The guy with the gun is a hero and it showed how important it is to have armed citizens. More guns would stop such events, only people that do not carry are defenceless. It should be mandatory to carry a gun for self defence.

Seems to take a well qualified weapons instructor, massive doses of luck AND NOT MORE GUNS.

How many qualified gun instructors are there?

seahawk · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:07 am

The funny thing is that the guy who intervened can be actually described as a role model for what is described in the constitution of a a trained citizen as part of a militia.

EA CO AS · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:09 am

Kiwirob wrote:
The good guy with the gun was far to late to save 26 people

And by engaging the shooter when he did, by all accounts, he kept the rampage from continuing. And yet, here's an interview where he insists he's no hero and gets teary-eyed, wishing he just could have gotten there faster somehow:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/11/07 ... -shooting/

If recent history teaches us anything, it’s that there is no reliable way to stop a man determined to commit mass murder. He can use guns, cars, trucks, fertilizer, or boxcutters to exact a terrible toll in human life.

The good guy can't be everywhere at once, but having more good guys out there wouldn't hurt.

kasimir · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:31 am

I have a serious question regarding “the good guy with a gun” theory.

Let’s assume for a second the good guy, is just a normal person, not a police officer and has no form of defense, security or firearm training. If the good guy shoots down and kills the bad guy in a public space (not as self-defense, but just to stop the bad guy), doesn’t the good guy essentially become a murder and has to atleast face a judge? I have a hard time believing that the good guy can just shoot the bad guy, without any legal consequences. I am not a legal expert, but isn’t this legally very sketchy and might place the good guy in jail for his “good” actions?

tommy1808 · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:33 am

kasimir wrote:
I have a serious question regarding “the good guy with a gun” theory?

Let’s assume for a second the good guy, is just a normal person, not a police officer and has no form of defense,security or firearm training. If the good guy shoots down and kills the bad guy in a public space (not as self-defense, but just to stop the bad guy),

The right to self defense includes the people around you.

best regards
Thomas

Aesma · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:48 am

luckyone wrote:
No, Europe has not completely banned opiates and psychotropic medications. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics and opiates can be had on both sides of the Atlantic, and many of them can be had in Europe in formulations not available in the United States (oxycodone immediately comes to mind). A great many of them were originally developed in Europe. Also, heroin can be legally prescribed in the UK and other European countries, and cannot in the States. Between the US and the UK at least, prescribing patterns per capita for antidepressants aren't much different. Now, if you would like to have a discussion about prescribing habits of opiates we can certainly do that, but get your facts straight before you do.

- Signed, a psychiatrist who knows these things.

There is no doubt we consume a lot of antidepressants. I don't know if people under Prozac are usually dangerous, though, nor become addicted to it.

On the other hand an average French person has never heard of Oxy (or only by watching US TV shows), only cancer patients are given such powerful drugs, while in the US you get it for a sprained ankle it seems, with crazy consequences.

WIederling · Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:53 am

tommy1808 wrote:
The right to self defense includes the people around you.

In Germany not all judges see it that way:
https://www.tz.de/muenchen/stadt/strafe ... 22259.html
http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/i ... 5dee6.html

tommy1808 · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:21 am

WIederling wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
The right to self defense includes the people around you.

In Germany not all judges see it that way:
https://www.tz.de/muenchen/stadt/strafe ... 22259.html

The attack happened after the self defense situation was resolved, he followed one of the perpetrators and the assult happened then. And for the judge apparently to late to justify it as excessive self defense. Without a full name it is sort of hard to figure out if the ruling stood or not.

http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/inhalt.umstrittenes-urteil-in-ludwigsburg-amtsgericht-bestraft-helfer.0e912ce4-0806-486e-9f32-86239c65dee6.html

The perpetrator later withdrew his appeal the evening before the court date... seems the Judge was right in her assessment.
Not that courts and judges don't make mistakes, but usually court reporting is for shit.

Best regards
Thomas

Kiwirob · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:26 am

EA CO AS wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
The good guy with the gun was far to late to save 26 people

And by engaging the shooter when he did, by all accounts, he kept the rampage from continuing. And yet, here's an interview where he insists he's no hero and gets teary-eyed, wishing he just could have gotten there faster somehow:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/11/07 ... -shooting/

If recent history teaches us anything, it’s that there is no reliable way to stop a man determined to commit mass murder. He can use guns, cars, trucks, fertilizer, or boxcutters to exact a terrible toll in human life.

The good guy can't be everywhere at once, but having more good guys out there wouldn't hurt.

It would appear that the rampage had already ended, the good guy was too late to the party.

Kiwirob · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:33 am

tommy1808 wrote:
kasimir wrote:
I have a serious question regarding “the good guy with a gun” theory?

Let’s assume for a second the good guy, is just a normal person, not a police officer and has no form of defense,security or firearm training. If the good guy shoots down and kills the bad guy in a public space (not as self-defense, but just to stop the bad guy),

The right to self defense includes the people around you.

best regards
Thomas

And if the good guy shoots and kills a bystander what then?? He should be tried for at least manslaughter.

WIederling · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:38 am

tommy1808 wrote:
The perpetrator later withdrew his appeal the evening before the court date... seems the Judge was right in her assessment.
Not that courts and judges don't make mistakes, but usually court reporting is for shit.

The public effect unfortunately is to not help and look away or go into "BILD auxiliary reporter mode" videotaping the carnage.

Especially giving damages to the original perpetrator is problematic in this context.

flipdewaf · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:40 am

I have no issues with the good guy with a gun thing, a well trained and well equipped person can stop a shooting or at least reduce it. The issue as I see it is how does one determine who is a good guy in the first place when the pro gun folks refuse to prove adequate training. Only those guilty of not training and handling their weapons correctly should be worried about being checked on.

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tommy1808 · Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:57 am

WIederling wrote:
The public effect unfortunately is to not help and look away.

yup, media is terribly bad in following up on those things and promote the actual outcome at a later date. But "he tried to help and now he got convicted" makes a better headline than "he claimed he tried to help, but actually assaulted someone" isn´t.

Kiwirob wrote:
And if the good guy shoots and kills a bystander what then?? He should be tried for at least manslaughter.

could be manslaughter, could be negligent bodily injury resulting in death, and maybe some others, and it would depend on the circumstances. I guess in Germany you would see something between one year (likely on parole without a day spend in Prison) and 10 years, depends on the how, why and so on and so forth.

best regards
Thomas

Aesma · Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:50 pm

In the US even cops end up shooting bystanders sometimes.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net